Oops, wrong url. Here it is again:
![]()
very good contrast..
care to share how you got the shot done?
thanks!!
Oops, wrong url. Here it is again:
![]()
Oops, wrong url. Here it is again:
![]()
this is one great shot..
coz from my 'last saturday's experience' hehe.. almost everyone (okies, the few of us who stuck together at PRP) had trouble trying to capture these colors for the eyes.. it's very tough to focus on the low contrast eyes..
i like!! :thumbsup: :thumbsup:
Oops, wrong url. Here it is again:
![]()
mac 13, Snowywolf, Gengh: Thanks for your encouraging comments.
Snowywolf:
The dynamic range of the scene was quite wide, ranging from the black sky to the bright reflection of the spotlights on the water. I wanted the photo to show the moonlight reflected on the clouds while not blowing out too much highlights. I thought that the camera exposure meter might not give me the exposure I was aiming for, so I set it to manual and "guestimated" exposure (ISO400, 3.0 sec, F5.6) and checked the histogram after the shot. It turned out quite alright. All I needed to do was process the raw file through ACR3.7 in Lightroom with slight levels adjustments to tone down the highlights and recover some details. This was the only shot I took (no bracketing), so I was quite lucky![]()
Thought i'd just share some of the B&W film photos I've been taking.. The picture quality isn't very good at all, which is mostly due to the scanner I used - the physical pictures look better. Add to that the amateurish skill of mine =p. Still, hope the idea is there (hopefully)
Pictures taken on MZ-50, Ilford FP125, using SMC - F 35 - 70mm kit lens, or SMC - F 80-200mm
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
maxwell market
Although it is just 0.2 different from the FA 50/1.4, the depth-of-field seems alot more shallow!
I already find the FA50 at 1.4 shooting head-only shots to be tough because of the shallow depth of field. !
cheers
Oops, wrong url. Here it is again:
![]()
*speak softly love*
softly spoken dad's love for the child..
:thumbsup: :thumbsup: